Electrification

Tracing its history back to WWII fighter pilot, Arthur Ellis, Ellis Patents is very much the global industry expert when it comes to securing power cables so that they remain operational and in place during a short-circuit

From its headquarters in the picturesque North Yorkshire village of Rillington, Ellis Patents has built such a reputation that no matter where in the world a major electrical installation is being planned it’s a fair bet an order for its British designed and manufactured cable cleats is under consideration, says Managing Director, Danny Macfarlane.

‘For any electrical installation to be deemed safe, cables need to be restrained in a manner that can withstand the forces they generate, including those generated during a short circuit, and this is exactly what cable cleats are designed to do’ said Danny.

‘Without them, the dangers are obvious – costly damage to cables and cable management systems, plus the risk to life posed by incorrectly or poorly restrained live cables.’

And in the rail industry this risk can be extended to costly and expensive delays caused by damaged cable installations on busy routes and in hard-to-access locations. Rail, says Danny, is an area that Ellis has focussed a lot of time and effort on in recent years – especially in terms of new product development.

‘The vast majority of work we do in other market sectors is confined to new installations, whereas rail work can, and often does, cover everything from the oldest imaginable electrical systems right through to the very latest. And the challenges we face vary massively between them.’

The challenges Danny refers aren’t simply restricted to securing standard specifications. Instead, the team at Ellis has been tested time and again to deliver innovative, often bespoke solutions; covering everything from curing a Network Rail health and safety headache through to finding a new way to install cable hangers in tunnels without disturbing the already installed power cables they needed to support.

Look… no bolts! Ellis’ No Bolts cleat was the answer to a Network Rail health and safety issue that had led to a couple of employees experiencing near misses when adding new cable runs on top of existing ones. The problem stemmed from the fact that existing cleats needed to be disassembled, bolts removed and replaced by longer, protruding ones – all with the added danger of having to remove and place back live cables while doing the work.

The innovative solution was a brand new cleat that could be stacked and fixed with nothing more complicated than a quarter turn fixing lock. This meant additional cable runs could be added quickly and easily, without any need to tamper with existing ones. Its rapid fit nature was further enhanced by the replacement of fixing bolts with a push fit locking mechanism that securely fastens the keepers and top clamps in place.

Manufactured from a high strength nylon specifically formulated to meet the London Underground’s 1-085 material approval, the No Bolts cleat is suitable for single cables ranging from 18-55mm.

Hanging on Ellis Patents has been successfully manufacturing and selling cable hangers for well over two decades, and it’s fair to say that its standard design was tried, tested and completely trusted. But despite this seemingly perfect situation, the team of in-house engineers in Rillington has long felt there was room for improvement and have worked tirelessly on developing various reimagining’s of the original product.

Key amongst these is a range of recently launched convex galvanised steel cable hangers that are lighter and astonishingly, stronger than previous versions. And the

product’s benefits don’t end there. It has corroded because of the material used; and now able to take a product from an idea in a rounded corners that reduce snagging the sharp edges of old cable hangers have brainstorm to a fully functional, production points; is suitable for cables up to 100mm rubbed on cables causing damage.’ ready prototype in just a few days really is a diameter; and is available with a curved global game changer.’ backplate, making it perfect for installation Bespoke benefits Certainly, the benefits of such rapid in tunnels. One of the most interesting aspects of Ellis product development for contractors,

Beyond the traditional galvanised steel Patents offering is its capacity to design, specifiers and installers working within the hanger, the team at Ellis has also developed develop and manufacture entirely bespoke rail industry are massive. Problems that Pegasus – a modular cable hanger system that was designed with customisation in mind. products for its customers. While the company has been doing this for ELLIS IS PROUD TO PRESENT could potentially have held up projects for weeks on end can now be quickly resolved,

Based upon an extruded spine a number of years, the service was initially saving huge amounts of time and money, as manufactured in tempered engineering grade Aluminium and covered with an LUL 1-085 confined to cleats being designed and manufactured to exact client specifications ITS NEW AND IMPROVED well reducing inconvenience for passengers in certain instances. approved outer shell; the defining feature of Pegasus is its choice of four differently styled and short-circuit tested to exact project conditions. This though has now developed CABLE HANGER DESIGNS. For Ellis Patents, the journey over the last decade has been as dramatic as the hooks, which means it can be offered in a to a stage where the team can be called in, shift in product development speed. In the multitude of formations depending upon presented with a problem and asked to late noughties the company spent a great specific project requirements. solve it – and because of the seismic leaps deal of time banging the drum about the

In addition, because Pegasus is an manufacturing technology has taken in importance of correctly specified cable insulated hanger it has excellent dielectric properties, which removes the need for Mk2 Cable Hanger recent years, this is something that can now be done in a matter of days. cleats – the aim being to ensure they weren’t overlooked in favour of inferior, unsafe earth bonding or grounding. ‘Traditionally, creating a production solutions like cable ties.

‘The market for cable hangers has been ready prototype would have required the Today, the role of cable cleats is better growing steadily for years but with so much development of the rail network in the UK – development of injection moulding tools, which involved significant investment in Rounded corners reduce snagging points understood and appreciated, enabling inhouse engineers, like the team at Ellis, to from HS2 to various electrification products time and resources, and typically took six fully explore the potential of cable cleats and – its growth is set to accelerate significantly’ to eight weeks to manufacture,’ said Danny. Spin galvanized (55µm or 150µm what can be achieved in enhancing existing explained Danny. ‘A key element of these new designs is that thickness) to BS EN ISO 1461 ‘And once received only small changes to the tools were feasible, meaning any major products and designing new ones. they address the issues associated with older products that have become apparent over alterations added another six to eight weeks to the entire process.6mm thick hanger and back plate the years. For example, older products have ‘Therefore, to be in a position where we are

Wide range of sizes available

Suitable for cables up to 100mm diameter

Custom designs available

Curved back plate to suit tunnel walls available

Tel: 01944 758395 Email: sales@ellispatents.co.uk Visit: www.ellispatents.co.uk

Cable Cleats Steel Cable Hangers Plastic Cable Hangers Cable Management Solutions

Bespoke Solutions

High Street, Rillington, Malton, North Yorkshire, YO17 8LA. United KingdomEllis Patents Ltd. T. +44 (0)1944 758395+44 (0)1944 758395 • sales@ellispatents.co.uk • www.ellispatents.co.ukHigh Street, Rillington, Malton F. +44 (0)1944 758808 North Yorkshire, YO17 8LA sales@ellispatents.co.uk United Kingdom www.ellispatents.co.uk

@ELLISPATENTS #HOLDINGPOWER @ELLISPATENTS Rail Professional #HOLDINGPOWER

The climate emergency poses a grave threat to humanity and our natural world. On this, environmentalists agree. How best to deal with this crisis, though, is subject to fierce debate

There are many tools we can deploy to decarbonise our world, from the wind turbine to the highspeed train. These typically come with localised harms which must be weighed against their global benefits.

‘Think global, act local’ is one of the tenets of the green movement. It challenges environmentalists to think holistically. Perhaps a prioritisation of the local (harm to a Home Counties woodland) at the expense of the global (the carbon-induced cataclysm of failing to tackle emissions) explains how HS2 has come to be opposed by the Green Party of England and Wales (GPEW).

This opposition is perplexing to some outside observers – surely electrified rail is exactly what we need to achieve a zerocarbon society? Surely rail needs to be expanded, to challenge the supremacy of pollution-spewing cars, lorries and planes? Well in principle, the Greens agree. Indeed, party policy expressly supports a new northsouth high-speed rail line – just not HS2.

In opposing HS2, GPEW’s stance is an outlier. High-speed rail projects are backed by Green parties on the continent and, closer to home, by the Scottish Greens. HS2 also finds increasing support within the GPEW membership, hence Greens4HS2.

Who are Greens4HS2? We are a group of GPEW members and supporters who have looked into HS2 and come to the conclusion that it is something the Green Party should support, albeit with conditions – more of which below. We want the party’s policy to change to reflect the role HS2 can play in reducing transportgenerated CO2 and improving local public transport – particularly now the railway is under construction and outright opposition to it is becoming more and more quixotic.

GPEW policy is set and agreed by its members, so any change needs broad acceptance and a supporting motion at a party conference – which the group aims to bring about. The group has coalesced around a Twitter handle @greens4hs2 and a website https://hs2.green/, but otherwise has no formal standing. Why Greens should support HS2 GPEW opposition to HS2 is based mostly on its negative impact on habitats – particularly ancient woodland – and communities. Its eye-watering cost is also a factor. What isn’t well understood by most Greens is the positive side: what we get from HS2 in return for those impacts, and how that supports Green aspirations.

GPEW transport policy is based on a set of overriding objectives, which focus on the need to reduce the resource consumption of transport and shift the balance from air, lorry and private car towards active transport, bus, boat and rail.

On top of these broader sustainability goals, the climate emergency adds a major urgency to the need to decarbonise. Of all the generators of greenhouse gases, transport is the worst sector and the one most resistant to change; in fact in recent decades the amount of CO2 generated by transport has actually increased, while that from power generation, industry and housing has gone down. Most of this CO2 is generated by road transport, chiefly cars. And, although most car trips are short and therefore potentially replaceable by active transport and local public transport, it is the smaller number of longer trips that eat up most miles and so generate the bulk of the CO2.

Various studies have looked into how to decarbonise transport, such as ‘Zero Carbon Britain’ by the Centre for Alternative Technology (CET), the Committee on Climate Change’s ‘Net Zero’ report and the UK FIRES ‘Absolute Zero’ report. Their route maps to zero CO2 all involve reducing the amount of travel but crucially, also, modal shift – moving the remaining travel from high-CO2 to low-CO2 modes. Rail, particularly electrified rail, is the lowest-CO2 mass transit mode there is for distances further than you can walk or cycle. Thus, they all require a large step-change upwards in rail use – as much as doubling it.

It is worth noting that analysis of Covidaccelerated changes to working patterns seems to be converging on an impact of about 20 per cent reduction in rail demand. These changes are exactly as foreseen by CET.

GPEW’s own internal decarbonisation strategy, which informed the policies in its 2019 general election manifesto, makes similar assumptions. It would require 50 per cent more rail travel, alongside major reductions in flying and car use.

So we are going to need significantly more rail capacity. But how is all this capacity to be delivered? This is where we say GPEW has failed to join up the dots. Adding capacity to our rail network is HS2’s raison d’etre. The need for that capacity was foreseen way back in 2003 at the time of Network Rail’s ‘New Lines’ study. At the time it was thought that population and GDP growth would drive the extra demand for rail. Greens wouldn’t necessarily buy that ‘predict and provide’ stance – but the problem is the same even if the main driver is now modal shift to help decarbonisation.

We recognise all the work that was done during the 2000s to look at how best to provide the capacity, and agree with the conclusion that the most effective way is a new high-speed line that relieves the big bottlenecks on the West Coast Main Line and at key hubs – Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds – by shifting the express trains that gobble up so much capacity on to their own tracks. By taking those trains away, space is opened up for much better local and inter-regional services centred on those key regional hubs; and by having the expresses on dedicated fast lines, we can have many more of them and they can be faster and so much more competitive with the car and air alternatives over longer distances.

Various other sets of interventions have been proposed as alternatives to HS2, involving upgrades to existing lines, some new lines and other infrastructure improvements as well as new signalling and train lengths. Some of these are seized on by GPEW as viable, but we share the view of industry commentators including Network Rail that they don’t make the strategiclevel step-change in capacity and capability that we need, as well as causing vast longrunning disruption to the existing network during construction that will put many prospective rail users off.

Further, none of the alternatives has had a proper environmental impact assessment or has been costed to the level of detail of HS2; none has been properly scrutinised or consulted upon with affected parties. It is clear to us that any major upgrade programme to existing lines will be as expensive as HS2, will cause much more disruption to the habitats and communities the lines run through than HS2, and will always be constrained in performance and operational resilience by its need to follow and interact closely with the existing Victorian infrastructure. We only need to see the objections coming in from affected residents along the reopening or new sections of East West Rail at Calvert, Winslow, Bedford or Cambridge to see what opposition such schemes would attract.

We challenge the modelling and assumptions that generate the spurious and oft-quoted result that HS2 won’t be carbon-neutral in 120 years. HS2 Ltd and the government have let the country down badly by allowing this narrative to take hold. On the one hand, we acknowledge the work being done by HS2’s engineers to reduce the scheme’s embodied carbon by sensible design and use of novel materials and techniques. On the other, we strongly maintain that Green policies to favour the use of public transport over cars and planes – frequent flyer levies, airport capacity reduction, kerosene tax, road user charging, scrappage schemes, fares subsidies, integration of public transport modes—will generate much bigger modal shifts on to HS2 from plane and car, and much more rail rather than road freight mileage, than the modelling suggests. And this will lead to a much faster payback of the embodied carbon and a continuing benefit long into the future.

So in short, HS2 supports Green aspirations for much better local public transport: there isn’t any combination of tweaks and fiddles with the existing railway that can deliver as much capacity in the metropolitan centres. It’s exciting to see how regional bodies like Midlands Engine Connect and Transport for the North are planning to put the capacity freed up by HS2 to good use. And HS2 supports Green aspirations to offer a good alternative to domestic flights – it’s genuinely competitive with air for our biggest domestic corridor, between London and the Scottish central belt airports. And it supports a decarbonisation agenda.

We also see other Green wins from HS2. Without it, the party’s aspirations to re-open lines closed by Beeching would founder, as the branch line trains would not be able to get into congested main stations. And by disentangling the express trains from the local ones, it enables the local services to be focused on the needs of their communities, rather than playing second-fiddle to DfTdriven national priorities.

Why is this take at odds with the Green Party’s view? We have taken the trouble to understand the rationale for HS2 from a railway perspective and to see that its purpose is to add capacity to the network, particularly at local level at the key Midlands and Northern hubs. We see that it is integrated with the existing rail network, not a separate premium overlay aimed at richer travellers or business people. We understand the value that its high speed gives – improving its competitiveness with air and car alternatives.

We see that its benefits accrue at least as much on the current railway network, for people living and working far off the HS2 route, as on the stations directly served. We see that it doesn’t make sense to say you are in favour of rail expansion, yet against HS2: there is no alternative set of schemes that gives you the same benefit, without building new lines. We disagree that the route and speed make the line needlessly destructive to the environment and habitats – in fact we commend the choice of route and the efforts that have clearly been made to minimise its impact.

We reject any notion, quoted by senior GPEW people, that work on HS2 comes at the expense of important upgrades to the existing network. In our view, they are complementary. We strongly support the electrification of all routes bar the most farflung, in a rolling programme. We support new infrastructure to relieve bottlenecks and improve capacity and speed – particularly north of Wigan and into Scotland on the West Coast Main Line, at Manchester and across the Pennines. We support the reopening of branch lines, such as the Oakhampton – Plymouth route in Devon.

But it’s not all roses: what do we want from HS2? Just because we understand the need for HS2 and support it, that doesn’t mean we agree with everything about it. There are a number of ways it falls well short of what we as Greens demand. We think much more needs to be done to integrate HS2 with other public transport – particularly at the ‘parkway’ stations such as Interchange. This station’s name is a joke: the bus interchange is 100 metres away, there’s no clear location for the metro interchange and the most salient feature of the station is an enormous car park. Compare and contrast genuine interchange stations such as Utrecht or Rotterdam.

We want HS2 to work much more sympathetically and collaboratively with the people impacted by its construction. It is painful for them to lose their local woodlands and green spaces, homes and farms. Control over subcontractors has been lacking and bad behaviour all too common.

We want all HS2 infrastructure works to leave a positive legacy for walkers and cyclists alongside and near the route. That means ensuring bridges and roadways have proper cycling and pedestrian provision per current guidance, and taking the opportunity to make access roads and haul routes usable after construction as cycling and walking paths.

We want the trains to be configured to allow space for non-standard cycles and tandems. The combination of bike and train is a powerful one for low-impact travel at all ranges – there is no reason why HS2 should not contribute. The currently specified cycle provision is minimal, and completely inadequate for people using mobility aids or cargo bikes.

We want HS2 to disconnect itself from any airport expansion schemes. Airport expansion is completely at odds with decarbonisation. In fact, HS2 should be actively promoting itself as an alternative to air travel.

And what about Green objections to HS2? We’ve covered many of the Greens’ standard objections to HS2 in our Twitter threads and on our website, but we’ll address a couple here.

HS2’s destruction of habitat, particularly of ancient woodland, is the biggest single objection. We of course, as Greens, understand the need to preserve and enhance habitats and hate that any sensitive habitat has to be lost. And we sympathise with those directly affected by loss local to them. However, we’re clear on two things – firstly, we’re going to have to build new infrastructure to get to zero CO2 – it won’t happen by itself, and the way that ancient woodland is scattered in small pockets across the countryside makes it all but impossible to avoid it all; secondly, the scale of impact from HS2 is grossly over-hyped. The amount of ancient woodland lost is very small – 39ha for stage one, representing less than 1/10,000th of England’s total. Even on the Woodland Trust’s list of threats, railways don’t appear in the top five. Greens would do far better to focus on those threats to woodland which don’t have any compensating environmental benefit, such as the RIS2 road expansion schemes.

HS2’s cost also features. Green statements speak of what else could be done with the money and how the project is colossally expensive. We say yes it is expensive, but it is an investment not a cost. It adds to the national debt, not the tax bill, at a time of very low interest rates; it addresses strategic concerns, and it generates a return – even if you accept the dubious modelling behind the economic case. In context, HS2 spending per year during construction is less than Network Rail spends on enhancing the current railway network, and represents about two per cent of the annual cost of the NHS. We also find it odd that Greens latch so readily on to the limited-funds austerity framing of the political right, while simultaneously favouring the massive expenditure needed for the Green New Deal.

We have covered other objections – threat to aquifers, excessive speed, energy consumption, CO2, synergy with airport expansion, connectivity – in our Twitter threads.

What do we want to change within the Green Party? We think the Green Party’s often-stated position of opposing HS2 is harmful to its political prospects, because it is illogical and behind the times now that the railway is actually being built and there is no realistic prospect of stopping it. It’s resulted in the party taking cues from sources deeply antithetical to Green causes such as the IEA and TPA. It’s meant a cadre of sympathetic, educated and technically-minded people being unable to support the party. It’s stymied the party from making constructive criticism of HS2 on its environmental record, and the government on broader transport policy – particularly on much needed investment in rail enhancement. It means every party pronouncement on rail in social media is jumped on for its manifest illogicality or cognitive dissonance.

We want to start a process of engagement and learning between senior GPEW leaders, spokespeople and policy groups and the rail industry. We regret that there is so much ignorance within the party about the working of the railways in general; and the challenges they will face in future as they have to absorb 50 per cent more passengers and much greater freight tonnage than pre-Covid norms. We believe that once there is a better understanding of rail in general within the party, the case for HS2 as part of the network will become clearer.

We want senior GPEW people and HS2 Ltd to meet so that the Greens can get a proper understanding of what HS2 is, how it is being built and how it is mitigating its environmental impact, to act as a counterweight to the criticism that comes from single-issue groups such as Woodland Trust and FoE which currently inform the party’s current position.

We want GPEW’s rail policy development process to include expert industry input, which has been sadly lacking. We applaud the different approach the Scottish Greens have taken—bringing in rail industry expertise, resulting in an ambitious, coherent and deliverable set of policies, clearly set out in their Rail for All document (https://greens. scot/sites/default/files/Rail%20 For%20All.pdf).

We want the currentlyconfused policy position of GPEW to be tidied up. At the moment the formal party policy is in favour of a north-south highspeed line in principle, yet later party statements all oppose such a line in practice. It is not at all clear what the actual party position is. In particular, we would like a formal revisit of the discussion that led to the first party conference statement opposing HS2, in 2011: we believe that was based on an analysis that, even if correct at the time, is now completely out of date.

We want the party’s policy to change to one of conditional support for HS2, with the conditions we’ve outlined above. There is much that the party will still need to campaign on – most importantly, for the broader transport policy context which will make HS2 a success: addressing the artificially-low cost of flying and driving; subsidising rail fares; limiting airport capacity; integrating long-distance and local public transport; regional control of local train services; best use of the freed-up capacity on the existing railway; better mitigation of habitat impacts; better integration with active transport; additional rail network enhancements such as electrification and capacity improvements. With a broadly supportive policy, Greens at a local and national level will have a much better platform to engage with HS2 constructively – as, for example, local councillors in Solihull are already doing, but without any support from their national party. As it stands, Greens can’t speak with a strong voice on any of these issues. By failing to think globally, we’re unable to act locally.

Adam Turner is Chair of the Northwest Wales Green Party and runs @Greens4HS2

With 20 years’ rail industry experience, at OPC Assessment we offer an extensive range of practical, reliable and innovative assessment tools to help you improve performance and assess suitability for a wide spectrum of roles.

For more information, visit www.theopc.co.uk or email us at admin@theopc.co.uk

SMEs say completing HS2 Eastern Leg in full is vital for their businesses, creating jobs and taking on apprentices. Kate Jennings, Director at High Speed Rail Group and Policy Director at Railway Industry Association explains how

The Government’s Integrated Rail Plan (IRP) is expected soon, and the future of HS2’s Eastern Leg is top of the rail agenda once again. The Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has given his commitment to the Eastern Leg several times in the House of Commons, but will these words hold true when we see the outcomes of the IRP assessment? This commitment must be kept, say SMEs, as revealed through a new survey conducted by the High Speed Rail Group (HSRG) and Railway Industry Association (RIA). The Eastern Leg, they say, is vital for the future of their companies, creating more jobs and taking on apprentices.

With the National Infrastructure Commission’s Rail Needs Assessment, published late last year, reluctant to support the PM’s original vision in the timescale initially envisaged, it is clear that the industry needs to redouble its efforts in presenting the case for the Eastern Leg. After all, leaving one half of the country without the wide-ranging benefits of HS2 would severely impact the UK’s ability to ‘level up’ following the pandemic.

HSRG and RIA are champions of the importance of prioritising connectivity for UK regions in the years ahead through a truly national high speed rail spine that will catalyse millions of pounds of private investment as we seek to kickstart the economy and build back better from the pandemic.

It is why we coordinated a survey of over one hundred SME suppliers in the rail, construction and engineering sectors. It found that HS2 as a whole, as well as dedicated parts of the route including the Eastern Leg, enjoy near universal support. The project is already creating tens of thousands of jobs and our survey found that SMEs are seeing the benefit through their work on HS2, or expect that winning an HS2 contract in the years ahead will generate future growth.

HS2 is ‘important’ for the future of 96 per cent of companies. It is not hard to see why there is such a high level of support, as 63 per cent of suppliers told us that they have already experienced an increase in turnover as a result of their work on HS2 and expectations are high among suppliers, with 83 per cent anticipating growth in their company. This is driving job creation with 61.5 per cent having taken on more staff, 38.5 per cent hiring more apprentices, and 69 per cent investing more in the skills of their workforce.

The decision on the future of HS2’s Eastern Leg will therefore have a definitive impact on suppliers, with over three quarters confirming they would expect to be negatively impacted by any curtailment of the route. Asked specifically about how such a move would affect them, four in five expect reduced revenue projections and nearly half would downsize staff. Limiting the scope of HS2 will put a block on jobs, not just from Tier 1 suppliers to the project, but companies of all sizes that work in the industry, which would in turn have an impact on communities and hold back the Government’s ‘levelling up’ agenda.

HS2 is a shot in the arm for many small businesses. In turn these firms are a boon for the project itself, with HS2 aiming for 60 per cent of the scheme’s supply chain to be SMEs. They bring unique attributes that should not be underestimated, from specialist products and services, to flexibility and greater knowledge of local areas, often recruiting and upskilling people direct from the areas in which they work.

The scheme will likely bring even more firms into the fold, as 84 per cent of nonsuppliers say that they intend to bid for HS2 contracts in the future and 88.5 per cent said that winning a contract would boost turnover. While most firms say that they would hire more staff, invest in the workforce and hire more apprentices. Again, winning a HS2 contract is ‘important’ for nine out of ten non-supplier SMEs and this is why it is vital for the Eastern Leg to proceed, as more than two thirds say that they hope to win a contract on this part of the project.

However, some barriers still remain to contracting on HS2, with 18 per cent of SMEs saying that they found the application process confusing and the same amount feeling unable to meet the specifications of the contract, while other concerns included poor visibility on the contracts out to tender. These issues will not only need to be addressed on HS2, but other major infrastructure projects ahead, so that rail provides a welcoming environment with easy routes into the market alongside simple procurement processes – a goal outlined by the Government in its forthcoming Procurement Bill.

HSRG, RIA and the SME supply chain welcomed the Government’s recent commitment to progressing HS2 from Crewe-Manchester in the Queen’s Speech. It provides further evidence that this will be a truly North-South network. But we need the same commitment as soon as possible for the programme’s Eastern Leg.

HS2 is transforming the economic landscape of the country, rebalancing the economy and bringing investment across the line of route and beyond. Only with both legs will the benefits be felt across the country, ‘levelling up’ many more areas and enabling the largest number of SMEs to be major beneficiaries of this investment - delivering directly to communities and supporting local jobs. As the Government seeks to build back better, it is time to back our SMEs to help build our future. Taking forward the Eastern Leg will provide certainty to the supply chain and support a pipeline of major rail projects in the years to come.

Jenny Wilbourn, Senior GIS Consultant at Atkins explores how interactive data mapping was used to track vegetation along the rail network and reduce Network Rail’s on-foot inspections by 80 per cent

When you’re responsible for ten million trees across 20,000 miles of rail tracks carrying 1.7 billion rail journeys a year, it’s vital to identify vegetation that might cause disruption to services, or damage to trains. It’s an issue that costs over £100 million every year – clearing lines, compensating passengers and repairing damage to infrastructure and rolling stock.

Network Rail’s Principal Lineside Engineer wanted to take a new approach using existing data. Could engineers understand the condition of the vegetation with less need for the workforce to undertake on-foot inspections in the hazardous live railway environment?

Atkins was commissioned to explore the possibilities and a Proof of Concept (PoC) was designed. This included the creation of a new intelligent vegetation management tool to: • Help proactively manage trackside vegetation. • Improve safety of the workforce and the passenger. • Comply with reporting requirements to the Office of Rail and Road.

To kick things off, Network Rail partnered with an Atkins delivery team, with myself as the lead geospatial analyst to determine if pre-existing data could be used to identify and accurately assess risk of vegetation encroachment, and to translate Network Rail’s standards into a compatible digital model to analyse and act on the findings.

Project and approach Using LiDAR, helicopter-borne laser technology, Network Rail already plots the surface of the earth along their rail routes, accurate to within a centimetre, creating mass point cloud datasets. Since 2014, they have held extensive aerial survey LiDAR data for the whole network. Network Rail was keen to collate all the information they held from different data sources to create a single point of truth. This would then allow for a reduced need for on-foot inspections and the effective allocation of resources to address any identified issues of vegetation encroachment.

This is a costly problem across the network with potentially life-threatening safety implications and its correct management is essential to ensure the safety of passengers and workers. • Trains can collide with fallen trees and branches on the track, causing severe injury, damage, disruption and delays. • Overgrown trees and shrubs can reduce the drivers’ visibility, cover up signals and potentially cause accidents. • Leaf fall causes delays to trains when they are crushed under train wheels, creating a layer like ’black ice’. • Weeds and scrubs pose trip hazards to lineside workers and restrict access to a safe walking route along the side of the track.

Based on this, we agreed two objectives. Firstly, to determine if pre-existing data could be used to identify and assess the risk of encroaching vegetation. And secondly, to translate Network Rail’s standards into a digital model and algorithm that could be used to inform their management and operations strategy and support regulatory compliance.

The solution My colleagues and I began by holding a series of workshops with senior stakeholders from across Network Rail. We needed to capture facts, opinions and aspirations from people with different areas of expertise: engineers, developers, operations teams - to ensure we created the right objectives. Next, we created a blended delivery team with Network Rail.

The team agreed an Agile approach, splitting the PoC into fortnightly sprints with clear goals. Each sprint ended with a review of collective outputs and planning the next activities based on the successes and challenges found during the sprint. This process was crucial: it ensured development was validated by people facing the current problem and who would be using the tool(s) in the future.

Network Rail’s existing vegetation management standard classifies vegetation into one of three categories, as shown in the image below. According to the specification, there should be no vegetation at all in the red immediate action zone; an action plan should be in place for vegetation in the amber action zone, and need to ‘be alert’ to any vegetation in the green alert zone.

The geospatial team used the Feature Manipulation Engine (FME) software to create a 3D representation of the encroachment zones around the areas of track being tested. A small 5km section of track was used in the first instance to provide early insights and a clear demonstration of the benefits of the project. The LiDAR data provided had exact height information for every point scanned, creating a point cloud that was post-processed to indicate features such as ground, track, buildings and vegetation. FME was then used to create bespoke vegetation elevation models from the classified point cloud. The vegetation elevation model was intersected with the encroachment zones to identify the locations, severity and magnitude of vegetation encroachment with respect to the existing Network Rail standards. To generate results quickly out FME workbenches were setup to allow us to run multiple sections of data in parallel,

The five kilometre trial proved a success and additional routes – for Wales and the East Midlands – were processed through the model.

The next challenge was providing the results in a visual format. We solved this by

using Atkins’ digital twin survey platform, Cirrus Insite, customising the web interface for early benefit realisation. The platform provided the resulting findings both visually, in an interactive map and numerically in terms of area (m2) to enable the best possible understanding.

This unprecedented approach utilised a complex interplay of 2D and 3D geometric techniques to produce a method totally new in the railway industry, creating immediately actionable results in a clear visualisation. By leveraging geometries within existing spatial data, the costly need to collect additional data was removed, enabling the PoC to move directly into production within a very short timeframe.

‘What excites me most about this work is the intelligence applied to the dynamic baselining. This model will be the cornerstone of a number of future digitised lineside inspection applications.’

Benefits and scaling-up Early visualisation of the benefits was key. The client decided to move the project from the Research & Development phase into prototype, with a plan for a phased rollout soon after.

Network Rail was given the FME code and extensive usable documentation so they could replicate the same process for other sections of the track. Our work went straight to the Digital Line Side Inspection decision support tool software team and Network Rail is now able to look at each section of their network, to clearly understand the extent of works required and enabling them to create a detailed management plan before sending people out onto the network. This has contributed to an 80 per cent reduction in on-foot inspections and savings of tens of millions of pounds a year.

Network Rail is now carrying out a new aerial survey of the whole rail network as part of its Intelligent Infrastructure Programme. The data from this and potential future surveys will be compatible with the new tools, keeping Britain’s railways clear of vegetation.

You can find out more at www.atkinsglobal.com or by contacting geospatial@atkinsglobal.com

Climate change constitutes one of the greatest threats to our planet and if unchecked could result in major catastrophes leading to extreme suffering and even the total extinction of the human race. Science is now firmly pointing the finger of blame for climate change at carbon emissions. Many studies have shown that the increase in carbon in the atmosphere is causing global temperatures to rise.

Carbon emissions have grown by almost 65 per cent since the 19th century and global temperatures have risen by around 1.5°. This rise may not seem like much but scientists agree that a rise up to 2.2° will cause catastrophic climate destabilisation resulting in storms, floods, seasonal disruption and droughts.

On the back of this alarming evidence Governments are now taking active steps to reduce carbon emissions. The Paris Climate Agreement was signed five years ago and is an international treaty aimed at rallying the world’s nations to work together to tackle climate change. The agreement holds all nations legally accountable for their actions, or inaction, in tackling and adapting to the devastating effects of the climate crisis.

The UK Government has been the first to pass laws to reduce emissions to net zero by 2050. This is one of the most ambitious in the world but is deemed necessary to head off a climate disaster.

The rail network is one of the cleanest and most energy efficient means of moving large numbers of passengers and goods. Considerable sections are electrified thus reducing the dependence on diesel powered trains. Network Rail is the first rail company in the world to set ambitious targets to limit global warming.

A significant problem with railway based emissions is that around two thirds of emissions are generated by suppliers, so Network Rail is working with with its wider supply chain to help promote climate friendly working practices. It is in this area where Torrent Trackside is playing an important role. Torrent Trackside is the leading rail plant hire company in the UK and has been supplying tools and equipment to the rail industry for over 30 years. The company has always been at the forefront of innovation and development to provide the best equipment to ensure rail projects and maintenance is carried out quickly, safely and efficiently.

A significant number of tools for rail work are powered by petrol engines. These engines generate considerable exhaust emissions thus contributing to global warming and polluting the local environment. Rail tools and supporting equipment need to be powerful and in the past fossil fuelled combustion engines were the only means of delivering that power.

This is now changing and viable alternatives to fossil fuelled tools are becoming available. Over recent years technological development of Lithium-ion batteries has seen dramatic increases in the amount of power available from rechargeable battery power packs. Battery power is transforming the way the rail industry works and Torrent Trackside is at the heart of this revolution.

The company is constantly searching for new and innovative battery products and they work closely with customers and leading industry manufacturers to help plan and tailor new equipment for rail specific operation. They now provide a comprehensive range of battery tools and lighting for many aspects of rail projects and maintenance including; rail and sleeper drills, ballast tampers, rail saws, torque wrenches, magnetic drills, stressing equipment and lighting.

Run times per battery have considerably improved enabling tools to get through a shift on one charge. Most of the battery equipment supplied comes with two batteries and quick chargers means one battery is charging while the other is in use so the tool never runs out of power.

The Cembre battery sleeper drill can drill over 100 holes and has a weatherproof sleeve to allow use in rain.

The Hytorc Battery Torque Tool is a quiet yet powerful tool for rail bolting jobs. Its accurate power delivery helps to eliminate cracked bolts.

The Milwaukee Battery Magnetic Drill combines emission free power with a strong 9000n magnet.

The battery packs are completely maintenance free and can operate effectively for hundreds of recharge cycles for high output batteries and thousands of cycles for lower output models. Batteries generally can operate for many years before needing to be replaced.

The advantages of battery equipment are numerous, the absence of liquid fuel is a major benefit. Carrying heavy cans of fuel to site and the problems of mixing are a thing of the past, as are hazardous and polluting spillages and leaks.

Power is instant with battery powered tools. The operator is in complete control and energy is efficiently used as the tools do not run idle. There is also no tugging on recoil cords or waiting for the equipment to warm up before operating at full capacity. The equipment works efficiently in all temperatures so gone are the days when time is wasted on cold starts, especially during winter.

The tools have zero emissions, this is good news for the environment but also for the operators who do not have to breathe in harmful fumes and particulates. Burns from hot exhaust and engine parts are also eliminated.

Operating costs are not affected by fluctuating fuel prices and with the mechanics of battery tools being much simpler maintenance costs are also reduced. A petrol engine has hundreds of parts a battery motor just three. Batteries are changed in seconds and quick chargers ensure batteries can be recharged quickly, some in less than an hour.

Hand Arm Vibration (HAVS) can be a major problem with hand held tools, seriously limiting operating times proving a health hazard to operatives. The lack of a combustion engine gives battery tools considerably lower vibrations. Some of the new battery tools have over 80 per cent less vibration than the petrol equivalents.

As well as reduced emissions battery powered tools are considerably quieter. Many rail projects and maintenance tasks are undertaken in residential areas and at night causing problems with residents and local authorities. Some of the new battery tools are up to ten times quieter than the petrol equivalents.

Service and logistics are also an important part of Torrent Trackside’s drive to cut emissions. Their team of dedicated rail professionals will assist in planning the most efficient equipment for projects. Smarter planning leads to reduced loads and less transport needs. The national depot network means equipment is never far from where it is required and low journey times and lighter equipment means less emissions.

Torrent Trackside also supply battery powered lighting and the range is growing all the time. Efficient batteries combined with state of the art optics and LED bulbs provide a range of lightweight, powerful and portable lighting options from hand held lamps to efficient link lights. The LED bulbs are considerably more robust than older halogen variants which need more power and are prone to failure.

Safety is at the core of the company’s business, all the battery equipment is maintained to the highest standards through a rigorous ‘in-depot’ maintenance programme and a fleet of fully equipped service vehicles manned by engineers with specialist testing facilities.

Torrent Trackside is a business built for rail and will continue to search for new ways of reducing emissions and minimising the company’s carbon footprint. Torrent Trackside will be exhibiting on stand G7 at Rail Live and all the new battery powered tools will be on display allowing visitors to learn more about them and see them in action.

Tel: 07715 159870 Email: carl.abraitis@vpplc.com Visit: www.torrenttrackside.co.uk

The Schweizer Electronic Group is a market leader for automated protection of track workers and equipment running on rails across Europe and the rest of the world

For over 50 years, Schweizer Electronic AG has developed and manufactured train detection and warning systems. Still a family owned business with headquarters in Switzerland, the groups goal is to increase safety whilst also improving access efficiency, user friendliness and overall productivity. Supplying countries across Europe for over a decade, the group provides a range of products including: • Automated Track Warning Systems (ATWS) • Lookout Operated Warning Systems (LOWS) • Semi-Automated Track Warning Systems (SATWS) • Signal Controlled Warning Systems (SCWS) • FLEX Level Crossings

Our core competencies centre on high security remote control and radio data transmission systems, along with interactive diagnostic systems for use wherever safety and efficiency are important. Within the business, all operating processes are governed and certified in accordance with ISO9001:2006 and CENELEC EN 50 126. Our newest radio-based product, Minimel Lynx provides a platform for the next generation of track warning systems and is currently being used in LOWS, ATWS and SATWS across Europe.

Automated Track Warning Systems (ATWS) Our ATWS system uses mechanical treadles or the most up to date wheel detection systems attached to the running rails to automatically detect the wheels of passing trains. These are positioned to provide a warning to track workers of approaching trains. The distances are applicable to the work area. A control unit processes these signals and passes the warning signal to either cable connected lamps or horns, whichever is required for the work site. This signal can also be used to operate individually carried radio warning devices for each worker and work group. A combination of signal devices can be set up to monitor train activity through crossovers and signaling, which leads to trains being automatically being counted out of the work area, therefore cancelling out the warning.

ATWS gives: • Automatic detection and warning. • Improved track access and workgroup productivity • Reduced headcount • Enables work on live rail or near an adjacent open line

Lookout Operated Warning Systems (LOWS) LOWS operates as a manual system and requires manpower to detect the trains approach. Positioned at an appropriate sighting distance, the lookout uses a hand switch to give the required warnings to track workers. These warnings are transmitted through mobile radio warning units carried by each workgroup. Cancellation of the warning is also carried out manually.

LOWS gives: • Protection at night or in poor visibility • Short notice access for mobile maintenance teams

Signal Controlled Warning Systems (SCWS) Schweizer Electronic offers a permanent safety solution for sections of the railway using SCWS. Similar to the other group warning products in that it improves track access and maximises network availability whilst continuing to provide a safe working environment for personnel track side, giving reliable automatic warnings. This is achieved via signals received directly from the interlocking which are then used to calculate the appropriate warning tailored to line speed and site conditions. Our SCWS solutions are capable of working with SSI, RRI systems and can integrate with ETCS and ERTMS.

Level crossings Manufactured using standard industrial components with Innovative LED optics and wheel sensor technology, our FLEX level crossing offers reliability and attractive lifecycle costs. Certified SIL3, FLEX uses a modular design to allow for lower costs across engineering, approvals and overall project. FLEX provides: • Reduced costs using PLC technology • A range of crossings from User Worked to

Multi Barrier systems • Plug and Play technology reducing installation times • Easily replaceable low weight barriers with no counterweights • Low lifecycle costs • RCM • Conventional or signal interlocking train detection

Tel: 01827 28 9996 Email: info@schweizer-electronic.com Visit: www.schweizer-electronic.com